The provision in the subject agreements permitting plaintiff to demand, as it did, interest not only on the money it advanced to defendant but also on the escrowed funds to which defendant had no access made the agreements usurious since, as the IAS Court found, it effectively required defendant to make combined interest payments at an annual rate of approximately 80% (Penal Law § 190.40; see, East Riv. Bank v. Hoyt, 32 N.Y. 119). We also agree with the IAS Court that the possibility of a nonusurious rate of interest in the event of defendant's full performance under the agreements, and language therein purporting to reduce the interest rate to the legal rate in the event of a finding of usury, do not make the subject agreements nonusurious (see, Durst v. Abrash, 22 A.D.2d 39, 42, affd 17 N.Y.2d 445).
Concur — Carro, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Kupferman and Tom, JJ.